Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) is making headlines after proposing a bill that would penalize schools that adopt the 1619 Project, a curriculum first introduced by Nikole Hannah-Jones for The New York Times Magazine which places slavery at the center of discourse in American history teaching
Mediaite reports: “The 1619 Project won praise for describing how slavery's legacy continues to affect present-day America, and Hannah-Jones won the Pulitzer Prize for her work. However, it was also subject to criticism as ‘historical revisionism' for some of its assertions, primarily the claim that the American Revolution was primarily fought to preserve slavery. Leslie M. Harris, who had served as a fact-checker for the project, was among several prominent historians who “vigorously disputed” this claim, as she wrote in an op-ed at Politico.”
Said Cotton in an interview with the Arkansas Democrat Gazette: “The entire premise of the New York Times' factually, historically flawed 1619 Project … is that America is at root, a systemically racist country to the core and irredeemable. I reject that root and branch. America is a great and noble country founded on the proposition that all mankind is created equal. We have always struggled to live up to that promise, but no country has ever done more to achieve it. I have no problem with people debating that in a constructive, reasoned, deliberate fashion. What I can't tolerate, what I think no one should tolerate, are angry mobs tearing down statues of anyone.”
“We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can't understand our country,” Cotton added. “As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction.”
If Cotton's Saving American History Act of 2020 passes, “school districts that embrace the curriculum would no longer qualify for federal professional development funds, money that is intended to improve teacher quality. Federal funding would also be lowered slightly to reflect any ‘cost associated with teaching the 1619 Project, including in planning time and teaching time.'”
